Philippines Country Report (Global Fisheries MCS Report 2020)
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
GLOBAL EVALUATION OF FISHERIES MONITORING CONTROL AND SURVEILLANCE IN 84 COUNTRIES PHILIPPINES – COUNTRY REPORT GANAPATHIRAJU PRAMOD IUU RISK INTELLIGENCE Policy Report - Volume 1 Number 1 © Pramod Ganapathiraju JANUARY 2020 SUMMARY This evaluation of Fisheries Monitoring Control and Surveillance report for Philippines is one of 84 such country evaluations that covers nations landing 92% of world’s fish catch. Using a wide range of interviews and in-country consultations with both military and civilian agencies, the report exemplifies the best attempt by the author(s) at evaluation of MCS compliance using 12 questions derived from international fisheries laws. The twelve questions are divided into two evaluation fields, (MCS Infrastructure and Inspections). Complete details of the methods and results of this global evaluation would be published shortly through IUU Risk Intelligence website. Over a five-year period, this global assessment has been subjected to several cross-checks from both regional and global MCS experts familiar with compliance aspects in the country concerned. Uncertainty in assigning each score is depicted explicitly through score range. However, the author(s) are aware that gaps may remain for some aspects. The lead author remains open to comments, and revisions will be made upon submission of documentary evidence where necessary. Throughout the report, extreme precaution has been taken to maintain confidentiality of individuals who were willing to share information but expressed an inclination to remain anonymous out of concern for their job security, and information from such sources was cited as ‘anonymous’ throughout the report. Suggested citation: Pramod, G. (2020) Philippines – Country Report, 11 pages, In: Policing the Open Seas: Global Assessment of Fisheries Monitoring Control and Surveillance in 84 countries, IUU Risk Intelligence - Policy Report No. 1, Canada, 840 pages. © Pramod Ganapathiraju All rights are reserved. https://iuuriskintelligence.com/ © Pramod Ganapathiraju GLOBAL FISHERIES MCS EVALUATION REPORT 1 FAO landings (2013): 2,126,634 tonnes Fisheries contribution to GDP (2012): 1.9% Law of the Sea (Ratification): 8th May 1984 Coastline: 36,289 km RFMO Membership: ICCAT, IOTC, WCPFC Patrolling Agencies: Philippines Coast Guard, Philippine Maritime Police, Bureau of Fisheries and Aquatic Resources Rank Priority for maritime security tasks 1. Narcotics trafficking 2. Human trafficking 3. Illegal fishing © Pramod Ganapathiraju GLOBAL FISHERIES MCS EVALUATION REPORT 2 SECTION 1: MCS INFRASTRUCTURE 1. Does the country have adequate surveillance infrastructure (patrol aircraft, sea based patrol vessels and coastal patrols) to effectively patrol fisheries resources within its EEZ? Score: 4 Score Range: 2-4 Surface and air assets of PCG and BFAR are grossly inadequate for patrolling a vast expanse of 7107 islands and EEZ area of 135,783 km2 (NIDS 2018; Heydarian 2015; PCG 2011b; Abuza 2012; Yabes 2008; Kraft 2011; Jane 2012; Cole 2012; Cupin 2014; Anon 2014; van Ginkel 2020). PCG has less than 40 ships to monitor the entire EEZ (Ranada 2019). Philippines Coast Guard (PCG) has six offshore patrol vessels (4 San Juan; 1 Balsam class; 1 Parola class); 2 coastal patrol craft (Tirad class) and 68 patrol boats (Military Balance 2020). Philippines National Coast Watch Center (NCWC) has improved the country’s capability to monitor its maritime domain. NCWC uses a multifaceted surveillance system that “integrates the information from sensors, such as the radar and Automated Identification System (AIS) receivers, VHF and HF communications, and radiation detection and identification equipment. This provides an overall view of maritime traffic” (Rabasa and Chalk 2012; Anon 2015; Calleja 2015). Philippines received four new patrol boats (Two aluminum 30-foot patrol boats with twin 480-hp engines, as well as two 34-foot patrol boats with 600 HP engines) from USA in November 2015 (Parameswaran 2015). Philippines Coast Guard (PCG) has also acquired three new multirole patrol vessels. In August 2016, PCG received its first multi-role response vessel (MRRV) “BRP Tubbataha” from Japan; the vessel is 44 meters in length and has a range of 1500 nautical miles with a top speed of 25 knots. In December 2016, PCG received its second second Parola-class multi-role response vessel “BRP Malabrigo” (MRRV 4401). On 7 March 2017, PCG received its third Parola-class patrol vessel ‘BRP Malapascua” (MRRV 4403) from Japan followed by BRP Suluan (MRRV 4406), BRP Pampanga (SARV 003), and BRP Batangas (SARV 004) later that year (Anon 2017). In 2018, PCG received four Boracay-class (OCEA FPB 72 Mk II) 24-mtre patrol vessels BRP Boracay (FPB 2401), BRP Panglao (FPB 2402) BRP Malamawi (FPB 2403) and BRP Kalanggaman (FPB 2404) from French shipbuilder OCEA (Anon 2018). In April 2020, Philippine Coast Guard (PCG) received a French-built 84-metre offshore patrol vessel BRP Gabriela Silang (8301) (Jane 2020). On 11 November 2019, received a 15-meter patrol boat with an x-ray inspection machine from Japanese Government (Anon 2019). © Pramod Ganapathiraju GLOBAL FISHERIES MCS EVALUATION REPORT 3 Philippines Coast Guard Rear Adm. Rodolfo Isorena suggests that the country needs 60 patrol vessels, with a minimal of 30 ships to provide any credible deterrence along the maritime boundaries of its EEZ; the country had 15 patrol vessels in 2012 year (Anon 2012e). The Philippine Coast Guard (PCG) has very limited number of patrol vessels to monitor 18,000 km long coastline (Anon 2012a,d; Catedrilla et al., 2012; Sutinen et al., 1992; PCG 2011b). The Bureau of Fisheries and Aquatic Resources also has limited patrolling infrastructure to monitor illegal fishing activities in municipal waters (Guidote 2008). Recent acquisition of 41 coastal patrol boats by Local Government Units could strengthen efforts to control poaching in municipal waters (Dalumpines 2011; Yleana and Velasco 2012; Truno et al., 2008). 2. Does the country have adequate trained officers to conduct MCS operations? Score: 5 Score Range: 3-5 Shortage of trained personnel especially for monitoring fisheries within Municipal and offshore waters in EEZ limits due to funding limitations and low deployment capability. No information is available on compliance or enforcement competence of these authorities in the marine fisheries sector. See Sutinen et al., (1992); Fernandez (2006, 2007, 2009); Angeles (2015); van Ginkel (2020) documents for more information. BFAR has recently recruited new officers (190 BFAR officers) for fisheries related work but most of these staff is not directly involved in inspections at ports or checking landings in artisanal fisheries where Municipal Governments exert more power. Moreover, the new graduates recruited by BFAR work on temporary contracts. Most of them work for different departments (aquaculture, licensing, vessel registration, etc.) under BFAR with very few engaged in fisheries inspections (Anon, pers. comm., 2017). 3. Does the country have adequate management plans to monitor their fishing vessels on the high seas? Score: 5 Score Range: 3-5 Philippines is not a signatory to the FAO Compliance Agreement. See Flewwelling and Hosch (2007) for more information on relevant aspects. See Barut and Garvilles (2009); Adolf (2019) reports for more information. © Pramod Ganapathiraju GLOBAL FISHERIES MCS EVALUATION REPORT 4 At present the country is trying to put up its management plan specifically for tunas (only tunas are assumed to be from the high seas) (Flores, pers. comm., 2012). Several Fisheries Administrative Orders (FAO) regulations have been drawn by BFAR for management of vessel activities on the high seas and within RFMO waters (e.g. WCPFC high seas pocket), but their effective implementation falls short of expectation in third country waters of Palau and Indonesia where vessels have been detained for fishing without permits on a routine footing. Philippines has a MOU with PNG for its tuna vessels landing catches for PNG canneries, ideally for data sharing and authorization of catch certificates for shipments bound to EU member countries (Anon, pers.comm., 2018). Philippines tuna vessels have been reported to operate illegally using FADs and pump boats in Indonesian waters for several decades now. Such illegal catches are landed in General Santos and Mindanao. Similar problems are reported with illegal fishing for the high seas fleet operating in Western Central Pacific countries. Foreign tuna longliners (Taiwanese and Japanese) land catches in Davao port where similarly adequate oversight is lacking. Current VMS coverage is low for the industrial fleet operating in Pacific island countries EEZs with very little coverage for vessels operating in IOTC waters; most of the distant-water fleet operates outside the radar with hardly any supervision from BFAR and other Government agencies (Anon, pers.comm., 2017). 4. What proportion of fishing vessels is equipped with vessel monitoring system (VMS) to monitor their movements on a continuous basis? Score: 1.5 Score Range: 1-2 Partial coverage of commercial fishing vessels (Mayuga 2017). All vessels operating in the Indian Ocean, high seas waters of WCPFC (High seas pocket 1) and PIC waters are equipped with VMS transponders (WCPFC 2019). BFAR was planning to install 5000 VMS transponders on commercial fishing vessels by the end of 2019 (PNA 2019b). According to Flewwelling and Hosch (2007) skipjack tuna vessels are covered through vessel monitoring system in the industrial fisheries. 414 Philippines